This is a drawing of a photo of a painting by Nancy White. |
The art was really good. It was about color and shape and size and perception and fluorescent lighting that looks like a blizzard on the brightest day of all time.
My friend said there's a gallery that features art in different types of light. Artificial light is so strange.
I got to meet Nancy, and she was very nice. She talked about how she made the work. She used matte acrylic on prepared, tinted paper. I had a hard time hearing exactly how she tinted the paper because it was loud in the small acoustic nightmare. But it sounded like she somehow textured the paper when preparing it.
The matteness of the work is partly why it's so successful, the light doesn't bounce off of it and jab you in the eyes, so you can look at it from many angles.
You should go see it. The man with glasses who worked there was very nice and helpful and showed us extra work in a drawer. The one in the drawer featured on the website was my favorite. I liked the green and purple.
After the show, we partied and went home. We had a really hard time finding a parking space but only because goddess was punishing me for making fun of the fossil fuel industry.
P.S.
I just read the Romer Young website description of Nancy's art, and it mentions the lack of white in the paintings. This lack of white, absence of white does something. The degree/range of contrast is reduced. The values of the painted shapes are rather similar, so they kind of blend together instead of having any one shape dominate the painting. This makes me think that there's a lack of subject other than maybe color or the painting as a whole.